Your June 2016 LSAT Instant Recap

NOTE: This post will be updated as reports roll in, so check back if you don’t find the info you’re looking for.

It’s over! You did it! (Or you didn’t, but you should still be interested.) What was it like? Well, reports are trickling in, but here’s what we’ve heard so far.

Logical Reasoning: Many of our sources – who will remain anonymous so the gangsters at LSAC don’t come after them – complained of a brutally difficult first LR section. It’s not clear whether this was the experimental, but, if not, it could bring down the curve.

Reading Comprehension: There was a passage on art (shock!), specifically clay tablets, that was apparently extremely difficult. Our sources – many of whom lost their lives to bring you this information – say it was the third passage, which is quite common for the super hard passage. Other than that, the analysis is that Reading Comprehension was straightforward.

Logic Games: Other than kinda weird subject matter like a game that talked about things made in the 1920’s, our sources – who need a nap and a drink, not necessarily in that order – alleged that this section was fairly straightforward.This has seemed to be true since the June 2014 exam, when students reported a funky game, the likes of which hadn’t been seen in a decade.

Experimental: Our sources – who have told us to just chill out because they need a few !@#$ing minutes to gather their thoughts – believe the third section was the experimental.

What say you? Got any intelligence? Was it hard? Easy? Crazy? Participate in the discussion below!

21 Responses

Good God. I went in cautiously optimistic and walked out like F****k, well I just bombed that. LR was brutal. Games are my strongest and I completely f**ked that up after the first LR section. Then it was two more LR and ending with RC that I also felt meh about. Comparative passage was 1st and I found it to be difficult but that could have been that I was just mentally f**ked after all.of.the.LR.

Also, way for LSAC to be hip with the times and have a question on that coconut oil pulling trend (to clean your teeth vs. brushing them) that was going around about a year or so ago. I eye rolled HARD at that and laughed.

Agree with Agnes & Tyler. Really struggled with time in LR section 1, got hung up on a few questions and before I knew it was far from completing the section when time was called. Definitely hoping LR section 1 was the experimental! Not sure if having back to back LR sections signifies that one is probably the experimental though? Games didn’t have anything crazy, but they did have a lot of rules and I was again more pressed for time than usual. Could just be after that first LR section, overall I thought games weren’t easy/mild but pretty straightforward. LR sections 3 & 4 were fine. RC definitely had some tricky answer choices. I even found the main point questions on a few passages harder to establish than usual.

Agree with Agnes & Tyler. LR section 1 was not fun, time was up before I knew it and I was far from finished. Definitely hoping it’s the experimental! Does having two LR sections back to back mean that one is likely to be an experimental? Didn’t find any of the games to be easy/mild & I did move too slowly, but overall they were straightforward. I didn’t easily see any scenario options under the time pressure & there were a lot of absolute ?’s that ate up time. LR 3 & 4 was ok, definitely some questions with a lot of sucker choice potential but not as bad as 1. RC wasn’t brutal, but definitely consistent medium/tough difficulty passages and answer choices. I even found the main point questions hard to dissect on a few passages. I think I’ll be studying for September :)!

The LG section definitely had some difficult, time consuming, local rules that lead to my difficulty in finishing.

The LR sections were just meh. Some difficult but some that were very easy.

The RC section was what really blew my mind. That art passage was trash and caused me to miss the entire last passage. I tried so hard to truck through after starting it but it was nearly impossible. I’m sure the LSAT guru’s had no issue though.

I had a 25LR, 23LG, 26LR, 26LR and 27RC. I thought the first of the 26s was extremely more difficult than the second. From what I could remember, the first 26 had more role questions than usual, had an early Parallel question and had a late Parallel Flaw Question. So instead of the Parallel and Parallel Flaw question coming in late, it was split in the section. P within the first 12 and PF within the last five. Can anyone who had the real LR sections confirm if this was the real one?

My brain is fried, but if i recall correctly, LG was my 1st section, and im confused now abt the lr and reading comp. I had two reading comps so i wonder which one was experimental. I think my 1st reading comp was section 3. There was a passage about Franz Kafka broken into A and B about how to approach reading his works in A and whether he is considered a great writer because a great writer poryrays the good in life but his life was basically shit. There was a passage about rice cultivation ehere historians recorded its origins to Asia due to their biss, but how its roots also originate in west african practice. Also a passage about jury nullification broken into the A and B passages, where A talks about the multiple problems jury nullification has, and passage B talks about how jury duty is actually beneficial to the just application of law to crime and conviction. I dnt get to all 4 passages so im sure the ones I remember are from the two diff sections i had. If any of these sound familiar to you please let me know, so both the others and i can know which of the two were experimental. Although i first have to figure out which is which HAHA. The games were straighforward and easier compared to the games section in December 2015 practice exam. LR wasn’t the easiest group of munchkins to handle but wasnt unexpected because the Games section was most likely the easier section. I think an easy, two moderates and a tough one were given. But who knows. Hope everyone did well, and YES may the curve be in Blueprint’s favor!

I had LR, Games, LR, LR and RC – which for me was ideal. It could’ve gone way worse if I had two RCs. Anyways, personally, I think this test was pretty spot-on in regards to the level of difficultly I was expecting for games, LR and RC section with the exception of the first LR section. I agree that the first LR was more on the difficult side than I was expecting for the first section. I usually complete 20 questions and usually get 15-18 questions correct consistently but when the 5 minute warning was given – I think I was still working on question 17 or 18 and I tried not to panic and just push through the section. Then came games, they were pretty doable I would say with the 3rd game being the most difficult one. I am just upset because the first game was an in and out grouping game with a little twist and I spent too much time on it because I overlooked something and did not make a deduction ( I figured this when I hit the questions and there was an absolute question). I got flustered and kinda discouraged when I hit the second game (pure sequencing with a little twist on the rules). I did scenarios but I couldn’t shake off the feeling that I was not confident in my answers for the first section and the first game that it affected my performance for the rest of that section. I tried to snap out of it and tell myself that that could’ve been the experimental section but then I figured it wasn’t; it just messed with me and my confidence. With that said, the games were not to crazy in comparison with the games from the June 2015. Section 4 (LR) was pretty goo and so was reading comp. Just a few things worth mentioning, I think both LR sections combined had like 5-6 principle strengthen questions and like 4 resolve/explain questions which I wasn’t expecting that many. Reading Comp had a surprising element – the comparative passage was the first passage and it was about jury nullification. I rightfully skipped the passage about ancient city of Uruk and its abstract language and hieroglyphics. I know I did not perform my best on the game section but feel okay to good about the other sections. Not sure if I want to cancel my score and retake in September or let the score show. Aghh what to do? that’s the million dollar question.

Honestly, I had 3 LR sections, so 1 experimental, and I didn’t find any of the 3 more challenging than the practice tests. I did find the RC very challenging, especially the passage mentioned above. The LG section seemed pretty typical. I Christmas treed what I perceived to be the most challenging game, like I always do. I have not ever been able to get through all the games on time, so I typically score between 14-17 on that section. I fortunately have a knack for the LR, so I usually still score in the low to mid 160s. I have been practicing 4 months, and I have only been able to increase my correct number right in LG by a few points, so I am not sure I’ll ever be able to hit above 165. Anyway, the RC section was definitely more challenging for me, and having it at the end was no help. Thinking if I ever take the test again that I will spike my water with 5 hour energy to be able to stay focused after the break.

Liza – From another discussion, this is what they are giving on the RC real vs. experimental. Makes sense to me because I didn’t get any of the experimental passages, but got all of the ones they listed as real:

I had 2 games sections, 2 LR sections and a reading comp. I was hoping the first games section was the experimental because I struggled with the first section and flew through the second games one easily. I’m wondering if some of us got different LSATS?

It’s possible that LSAC has started administering the experimental section on different sections of the exam, but their established practice has been to have it apply across exams. From what I know about the exam, I’m guessing one of your games sections was section 3. If so, that likely was the experimental.

I can verify with an 80% confidence interval that the first LR section was not experimental (I had a really brutal first LR and two reading sections). I ended up getting to question 18 when 5 minutes left was called, so I really hope that the curve adjusts for it.